Is there a God?

[Vezon Dash]

Nor can you attribte it to religion... As much as I cringe when I hear it, there ARE churches and such forth that allow gays and even have gay preachers.

[Jonanananas]

You have to question how many theists think being gay is wrong because of scripture. And I don't mean them saying it's wrong because of that, it's them actually believing it because of that.

 

Or, to say it differently: I believe that a large percentage of theists disliking gays would still like gays if they were atheists.

[Guest Rob]

Out of curiousity, Vezon, do you believe homosexuality is wrong because of your religion, or do you have other reasons to believe it?

[Assume Nothing]

By that argument, it still follows that it helped cause some of the 'bad' things that they did.

 

It could be argued that if their religion didn't teach them that homosexuality is 'wrong', then they could have been taught of multicultural acceptance and thus minimized the risks - i.e. risk aversion. It's unlikely to happen in more fundamentalistic backgrounds simply because it doesn't cooperate with the religious beliefs.

 

I can't speculate with any certainty how many wouldn't have harmed others if they weren't theistic, but I can say with some certainty that it would be a smaller number than that if religion wasn't causing it.

 

EDIT @Vezon: It's called an exception to the rule - as long as some still ostracize homosexuality, religion causes harm.

[Powerfrog]

When you're choosing which teaching to follow from the bible, can you really claim that it is the source of your morals? Surely you're using your own morals to choose which you will follow, rendering the bible completely useless in that regard.

 

I don't think that religion is to blame for all the worlds problems, but it's a great excuse for people to hate and murder one another. An excuse that could be removed. (Not necessarily by removing religion or the idea of god, but removing all of the "treat people that are not the same as you differently" stuff, of which theres a LOT.)

 

You have to question how many theists think being gay is wrong because of scripture. And I don't mean them saying it's wrong because of that, it's them actually believing it because of that.

 

Or, to say it differently: I believe that a large percentage of theists disliking gays would still like gays if they were atheists.

 

I think it says a lot for my point that religion generally has a "they're different than me so treat them differently" by the fact the overwhelming majority of these bigots happen to be religious.

[Guest Rob]

By that argument, it still follows that it helped cause some of the 'bad' things that they did.

 

It could be argued that if their religion didn't teach them that homosexuality is 'wrong', then they could have been taught of multicultural acceptance and thus minimized the risks - i.e. risk aversion. It's unlikely to happen in more fundamentalistic backgrounds simply because it doesn't cooperate with the religious beliefs.

 

I can't speculate with any certainty how many wouldn't have harmed others if they weren't theistic, but I can say with some certainty that it would be a smaller number than that if religion wasn't causing it.

 

You can blame beliefs both ways, though. On one hand you can look at an extremist who killed for his beliefs and say "It's because of religion!" but you could also take an atheist murderer and say that if he had of been religious, he wouldn't have killed. The argument can go either way and it does neither side a favor really.

[Vezon Dash]

It is a little bit of both. First, the bible says that it is wrong to be homosexual. (God killed all of the gays for being gay in Sodom and Gomorrah) Secondly, I lived with a gay guy one summer, and he was a very very bad first impression on the gay community. I know that there are some really nice gay people out there (I've even met a few), but ever since I met that one guy, I just haven't liked them. Then again, I just think some guy shoving his dick into some other guys [wagon] is just gross.

[Assume Nothing]

We could only attribute causes positively, but if anyone could help me pull up some statistics, the crime rates would argue otherwise (especially violent crime).

 

Of some relevance:

 

[Vezon Dash]

By that argument, it still follows that it helped cause some of the 'bad' things that they did.

 

It could be argued that if their religion didn't teach them that homosexuality is 'wrong', then they could have been taught of multicultural acceptance and thus minimized the risks - i.e. risk aversion. It's unlikely to happen in more fundamentalistic backgrounds simply because it doesn't cooperate with the religious beliefs.

 

I can't speculate with any certainty how many wouldn't have harmed others if they weren't theistic, but I can say with some certainty that it would be a smaller number than that if religion wasn't causing it.

 

EDIT @Vezon: It's called an exception to the rule - as long as some still ostracize homosexuality, religion causes harm.

 

 

It is being more and more accepted though....

[Assume Nothing]

... but would you say that the increasing acceptance is due to more correct interpretations of scripture, or the interference by secular organizations which promote equity?

[Vezon Dash]

Secular organizations. More and more people lose the true meaning of the scriptures every day.

[Assume Nothing]

If the involvement of secular organizations is making the positive impact, I fail to see how you could argue that religious ideals in itself is the positive thing. I'd argue that it's inherently negative with gradual positive changes.

 

All in all, it doesn't really support the arguments that any of the 'gods' are the 'correct' deity by any regards, but we can measure its effects on individuals and society in general. Could we agree that religion is harmful now?

[champion]

This topic was a lot more interesting before it turned into a "are Christians worse people than atheists" thread.

[Randox]

The easiest way to explain the difference between moderates and fundamentalists, as they view the bible, is to let them speak for themselves. So here are the views on the bible from the UCoC and another religion which I am just not going to name, that falls on the fundamentalist side.

 

The Bible is central to The United Church of Canada. As a source of wisdom, personal prayer, and devotion, we believe the Bible can bring us closer to God. It remains one of our best ways of experiencing God's continuing work of creation and liberation in the world, while offering us forgiveness, healing, and new life in Jesus.

 

We often refer to a passage as "the Word of God." By this we mean the writer was inspired by God.

 

Yet we also know the various books that make up the Bible are the stories of two ancient communities trying to be faithful to God under difficult circumstances-ancient Israel and the early Christian movement-and some of what was experienced and written then doesn't fit with today's world. We don't condone slavery, for example, or stone those who commit adultery.

 

Nevertheless, in its stories and teachings the Bible has a mysterious power to inform our lives.

 

The Bible speaks the Creator's directions to us, like a detailed road map that clearly shows the exit ramp directly into heaven. It is also much like an owner's manual for a life ready to be lived on the cutting edge of liberty.

 

Sometimes His voice speaks through stories, such as those of David and Goliath, Ruth and Boaz, Naaman's little servant girl, Christ on the cross, and fisherman Peter learning how to tend sheep. Some of these stories teach us how to handle the troubles we face each day. Others fill us with hope and peace. Each of them is like a personal letter from God to you.

 

Portions of Scripture are direct instructions and laws from God such as the Ten Commandments, recorded in Exodus 20. These tell us more about God and His expectations for us. When people asked Jesus to summarize these commands, He focused on the way God's love affects the way we live. "Love the Lord your God with all your heart, mind, and soul," He said. "And love your neighbor as you love yourself."

 

On other pages the Bible gives God's practical advice and encouragement through parables, lists, promises, and warnings. Amazingly, though many different writers throughout thousands of years wrote the Bible, each page describes the same God in ways we can understand and apply in our lives today. This book is always His voice talking personally to anyone who is willing to read and hear.

 

God loves us even when we choose to reject His love. In those times He allows us to walk away into the life of our own choices. Yet He is still there, always ready to redeem us from the results of our decisions.

 

A moderate religion encourages you to think for yourself and find meaning in the scripture, rather than blindly follow it. A fundamentalist religion will tell you what to believe and how to act.

[Assume Nothing]

@champion: If we don't have reasons to believe, evidence to believe, any form of trust in religious advocates, and reasons of why belief is bad... why believe?

[Vezon Dash]

@champion: If we don't have reasons to believe, evidence to believe, any form of trust in religious advocates, and reasons of why belief is bad... why believe?

 

There is a reason to believe though.

[champion]

@champion: If we don't have reasons to believe, evidence to believe, any form of trust in religious advocates, and reasons of why belief is bad... why believe?

Because non-extremist belief in religion can be good. Doesn't have to really harm anyone.

[Randox]

And as a point of interest, the Bible can be used either way on a number of issues because of the contradictions. So another quote, much as I hate to keep doing this:

Jesus welcomed everyone, whether they were poor, rich, or just getting by; ill or healthy; self-made or educated; popular or a loner; secure or full of doubts.

 

The United Church of Canada prides itself on welcoming everyone the way Jesus did, regardless of age, race, class, gender, orientation, or physical ability.

 

It really depends on the religion. Some of them promote peace and kindness, and caring for others, and some promote hatred and violence. You don't need religion to do that though. Just because some of the religions promote terrible things doesn't mean that all of them do. While some are busy trying to get people to blow shit up attack gay people, others are trying to get people to accept everyone and provide humanitarian aid to other countries.

[Assume Nothing]

Please elaborate; how does it help? Can we do without it? If harm is not a requirement, but a relatively likely byproduct - is it still good? Oh, and what makes the belief more true/plausible?

 

EDIT @Randox: It's a thing we can do without; its benefits are negligible and can be achieved just as well, if not better, with irreligious organizations without the extra burden of increasing the risks associated with religion.

 

Further edits:

 

@champion: If we don't have reasons to believe, evidence to believe, any form of trust in religious advocates, and reasons of why belief is bad... why believe?

 

There is a reason to believe though.

I'd like to know what this reason(s) is.

[champion]

Please elaborate; how does it help? Can we do without it? If harm is not a requirement, but a relatively likely byproduct - is it still good? Oh, and what makes the belief more true/plausible?

I'll just make a very simple example. Say someone has been an atheist for years and years, but they decide to start attending mass. That person is then inspired by the teachings of Jesus in the Bible, and is motivated to do some volunteer work, or donate to charity.

 

Could this person have learned that it's "good" to donate to charity without religion? Sure. But it might take that leap for someone to get involved in a moderately religious lifestyle before they start becoming a "good" person. There is an example of religion being a positive motivating factor in someone's life.

 

I'm not saying anything about religion being more true because of this, I'm just saying that moderate religious belief isn't as harmful as you seem to think it is.

[Assume Nothing]

I'd say that's failure on the part of promoting secularist teachings, not the merit of religion. I don't see many examples of such though, so whilst it sounds nice in theory, it doesn't necessarily work that way in reality (not denying that it does happen, because it sounds plausible)

 

EDIT - on the part of donating to charity, I'd like to ask: which charities are we talking about? If we're talking about donations to the churches, that's a whole different story (inefficient charities squandering money, i.e. opportunity cost argument.)

[Vezon Dash]

What happens if there really is a place such as Heaven and Hell, or maybe reincarnation and Karma exist. The only way that I will be able to save myself from Hell or being reincarnated into a dandelion would be to believe.

 

Is that logical or not?

[Randox]

I'd say that's failure on the part of promoting secularist teachings, not the merit of religion. I don't see many examples of such though, so whilst it sounds nice in theory, it doesn't necessarily work that way in reality (not denying that it does happen, because it sounds plausible)

 

EDIT - on the part of donating to charity, I'd like to ask: which charities are we talking about? If we're talking about donations to the churches, that's a whole different story (inefficient charities squandering money, i.e. opportunity cost argument.)

I'm confused, which of us is this aimed at?

 

EDIT: You edited while I was quoting. Never mind.

[Assume Nothing]

What happens if there really is a place such as Heaven and Hell, or maybe reincarnation and Karma exist. The only way that I will be able to save myself from Hell or being reincarnated into a dandelion would be to believe.

 

Is that logical or not?

 

I've addressed this in one of my earlier responses about the Pascal's Wager (which is what you're appealing to).

 

@Randox: I was talking to champion in that post.

[champion]

EDIT - on the part of donating to charity, I'd like to ask: which charities are we talking about? If we're talking about donations to the churches, that's a whole different story (inefficient charities squandering money, i.e. opportunity cost argument.)

Uh, a good charity that helps people efficiently.